*'''For'''. This one made me laugh a lot.--[[User:Witt E,|Witt E,]] 05:12, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

*'''For'''. This one made me laugh a lot.--[[User:Witt E,|Witt E,]] 05:12, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

+

*'''Against.''' It's an ok article, doesn't have that [[thingy]] that takes it into hallowed VFH territory. I didn't get some references, probably because I'm an aging hippie <>s>old</s>. It could use something extra... Vienna Sausages, perhaps? --{{User:Zim_ulator/sig}} 15:25, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Contents

Current Nominations (new stuff at top, prefix votes with * )

SELF-NOMINATION REGULATION: self-nominated articles (i.e. you write an article and then decide to nominate it yourself) must be at least a week old before nomination. Articles nominated by people other than the author can still be nominated at any time.

AgainstFOR I also doth hate the little rockets, in Germany, it's called Pimp Meinen Fahrrad, Tip of the Hat to you sir... I changed my mind after I read it like three more times.--Severian 22:19, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

For There were some rough bits, and it certainly should be merged with Lawyers... but it did make me laugh reading about the rolex... --Mindsunwound: (MUN) Suppository Sickness Man Babies 15:06, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Wow. Of all the stuff I've written so far this month, I'm not certain this is this best of the bunch, but thank you thank you & thank you. :) And For. --Bear 22:31, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

CommentForI can't vote for this one because every time I read "Root of all Evil"... I think wait... it should be "Route of all Evil" in this context... which distracts me from the article itself... and I can't vote against it, because if the word Root was replaced in each instance with Route... I would love the article...Good Article... I re-read it... nevermind the crap i said before... --Mindsunwound: (MUN) Suppository Sickness Man Babies 23:03, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

For. Though I'm American, I still see the humor here. Incidentally, everyone who was complaining about this winning a Poo Lit can just ignore Minds' message up there.--<<>> 12:21, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

I'm confused, what does poo lit have to do with people voting elsewhere? --Mindsunwound: (MUN) Suppository Sickness Man Babies 17:37, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

For. I spent ages on them pics... HindleyiteTalk 17:49, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Weak for. Although I didn't get a lot of the jokes, the pics and such are funny. It just needs some more jokes that people who aren't British will understand. --User:Nintendorulez 21:18, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

What the hell is this?????? It's a disgrace to Uncyclopedia. It is intelligible, has a continuous train of thought, and lacks misspellings. There is no use of the word "poo" or any profanity, no "your mom" jokes, no homophobia, no "In Soviet Russia" jokes or random celebrity references. All in all, it appears to have been written by someone who is neither stoned nor suffering from major brain damage. And dear god, the writer has gone so far as to employ subtlety. Makes me want to destroy a box of pencils. Oh, and For.--InfiniteMonkey 22:27, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

Against not my cup of tea. Having said that I think that the three Poo Lit Winners should be featured as a matter of course.... -- Sir Mhaille (talk to me) 23:31, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

For - This should be featured, next week should be declared The Week of Grumpikins and everyone should destroy a #2 pencil in honour of the occasion. So subtle and oh so hilarious! (and I agree with Mhaille that Poo Lit winners should be automatically featured) --Imrealized 23:33, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

For - it won that poo lit thingy (I'm not bitter. I try to be, but I'm not), and it reminds me of the time that I lost my medication. Modusoperandi 02:09, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

For if only for the illustrations and because if it beat my article it must needs be very good indeed. --Spin 04:26, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

For I'm a bit biased 'cos I added a few lines. I think it's definitely featured article material but I agree it can also be improved substantially. For instance "thick-rimed" glasses? Pocket protectors is an outdated stereotype- I don't know if I've even seen anyone wear one(and I know plenty of nerds), or if you can even buy them anymore. --InfiniteMonkey 22:34, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

For. This one made me laugh a lot.--Witt E, 05:12, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

Against. It's an ok article, doesn't have that thingy that takes it into hallowed VFH territory. I didn't get some references, probably because I'm an aging hippie <>s>old</s>. It could use something extra... Vienna Sausages, perhaps? --Rev. Zim(Talk)Get saved! 15:25, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

+ This one has a story behind it. It started out as Howto:Survive a Robot Uprising, but after consultation between Fasmine, Nytrospawn, and myself, it was merged here with my own material. Go and vote for, guys! --Hobelhouse 00:07, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

Against I think I already read this one, but it was a different article... wait... that would mean that this is unoriginal repetition of something that wasn't that funny in the first place... kinda like euroipods... --Mindsunwound: (MUN) Suppository Sickness Man Babies 15:01, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

For. Could a bit less list-oriented, but it's good enough to get some laughs from me. -Conniption 17:20, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Nominate and Strong For - This is hysterical brilliance. It helps to know a little about Cage, but I think it'd be funny without that knowledge. Very well-written comedy. --Imrealized 07:09, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

For. Man, this guy WAS high on kittens...--<<>> 18:13, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

For. Amusing, and 4' 33" is my favorite song so I must vote yes! --Rev. Zim(Talk)Get saved! 23:48, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

For - I like to say 'exuberant' often, not just for effect, but as a real descriptor. This writing is clever and exuberant, and made me chuckle. Well done, I say, well done. — CornetSir Wilde Weas'lKUNVFHFP 15:17, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

For - I actually own a copy of Piano Falling Down Five Flights of Stairs in A Minor and it is some of his best work! Triddle 00:39, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

For - I've definietly heard 4'33" before. I haven't heard some of the others, but I was especially entertained by that section. --epynephrin 16:07, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Against. Some good jokes (eg the extended dance remix of 4'33"), but it's quite badly written. Heaps of grammatical errors and sentences that don't make sense - including the first one of the article! -Conniption 10:32, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

For. Because it zings with harmonious counterpoint.--Hardwick Fundlebuggy 05:29, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

Against This article had a LOT of natural potential, which was completely quashed by stupid kitten huffing references that had no relevance to the complete insanity of this already bfi person --Mindsunwound: (MUN) Suppository Sickness Man Babies 15:02, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

For. Very good, affectionate, i didn't know who the fuck he was but it still made sense and ammused - jack mort |cunt| talk - 12:35, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Against - In what appears to be a sadly predictable trend for me. Even though the subject manner is handled cleverly, it's still one big anal sex joke at the end of the day. — 2nd Lt.Sir Edward, the Weasel of WildKUNVFHFP 17:44, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Weak NEG-A-TIVE. I like this. I really do. It's smart, and I laughed. But I have to agree that the front page is starting to get too predictable in its display of crassness. I'm all for smutting it up, but too much of a good thing, and all that... maybe later. Yeah, definitely later. And no, not like that, you filthy bastards. I'm a trashcan. --The King In Yellow (Talk to the Dalek.) 15:10, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

talking of being out of four, or four, the Greeks did not have a word for four, well they did, but nobody cares. Anyway, it's a very weak for. Talking about four weeks... ~ Ghelæ talkcontribs 16:04, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

For loops are a quite useful construct in computer science. They allow you to... --Andrusi 16:14, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

For. This is really rather good, it snuck right up on me. More like [tangent] than [distraction] though - jack mort |cunt| talk - 12:08, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

For. Very funny. For those who don't know who he is, I think this line in Wikipedia sums it up: "Le Corbusier's theories were adopted by the builders of public housing in the United States. For the design of the buildings themselves, Le Corbusier said "by law, all buildings should be white" and criticized any effort at ornamentation." -- Rei 16:43, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

Weak For. The end is a little too repetitive, a machine of repetition.--Rataube 21:37, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

OMFGZYAIS FOR: At first glance it seemed factual and uninteresting but as soon as I actually started reading it, I came to be aware of what genius this article is. --Sirgwax (talk) 04:43, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

For Although, it's probably necessary to have a basic knowledge of Voyager. Otherwise it may seem factual and uninteresting. There's a whole lot of references to pop culture, historical events, etc that make it especially funny. Very subtle humor for the most part. -- – Mahrowwa.k.a.Emir Henry A. Tootsie 23:58, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

For. Despite my attempts to destroy the competition by repeated and reckless copyediting, this article is still good. ;-) Subtle, yes, but I really like that. We get plenty from the other side of the spectrum. ~ T.(talk) 05:25, 17 February 2006 (UTC)